Speakers: What's MOST important to you?...

For me, it's detail. I want to hear what is on the record or CD. The down side to being able to hear fine detail, is that I now know that only about 15% of my music collection has a combination of good playing, recording, mixing, etc. And only 3 or 4% is truely excellent, with most of the top 5% being a single cut from an otherwise unremarkable effort. The rest is good for background music only.

Last weekend I was transferring six CD's to tape, as a favor to a young engineer I work with. Thank god for the mute function on my preamp! One was listenable (Moby) with decent playing and recording, the others were poorly played (the drummer for Bad Religion needs to find another line of work) and had no soundstage, separation around the instruments, etc.

Sorry, I got off on a tangent (sounded like my father 30 years ago).

By the way, I agree with Twl regarding getting rid of resonance. In my system I have tried cones, footers, bricks, marble bases, etc., etc. By far, the most noticable improvement (better resolution of fine detail) has come by adding audiopoints under my monitors and selected components.

Best regards, Dave

Realism, then soundstage depth (width is easy). Also, accuracy of the midrange. I'm with Philjolet and Phasecorrect on this important point the. After working the live voices and instruments for 10 years I can't handle most speakers when listening to acoustic music. Don't get me wrong, I listen to a lot of pop and rock, but those recordings are EQ'd like mad (even if it isn't through the listening board/computer).

Let me share with you something I read in a magazine back when it was Stereo Review when Julian Hersch was still there. This is a paraphrase.
--Ask to hear the three best speakers in your price range connected to a front end similar to yours. Use a cd you've heard a hundred times.
--Compare them two at a time,with the volumes the same,with the demonstator not telling you the name brands.
--Keep a chart of these four things checking the better performer in each of the catagories:
#1.Timbre,does a violin sound like a violin,etc.
#2.Imaging,can you follow two or more horizontal lines at the same time without the speakers getting in the way? Don't worry about instrument location;that comes with proper placement in your room. If you can follow counterpoint,that's a lot in a speaker demo room.
#3.Dynamic Range,does the distance between very loud(ff) and very soft(pp) sound life like or shorter than real life?
#4.Frequency extremes,do violin double stops sound pleasing or strident? Is the bass booming and bloated or tight and compact?
--once you have the better system,compare that against the third pair.
--If you like the pair you've selected,start neogiating.If you don't keep looking.

Let me answer your question. I'm an imaging nut with a hard core Magnepan habit.

Have the speakers disappear and forget about critiqueing the sound and just connect with the music.

I agree with Jayarr. When I forget about the music and get into the performance then its time to bring out the check book. I am personally an imaging fanatic. If the speaker can't throw a reasonbly full size image in height and width at me I'm not interested. I know some would argue dynamics is the thing. Well for me its not dynamics because I don't listen very loud. And in truth in most concerts amplified and unamplified I rarely hear truly dramatic changes in volume. Except for large scale orchestral most concerts are amplified to some degree. I don't go to that many large scale classical concerts. What I do hear are dramatic changes in attack. Stats and planars seem to master speed of attack while they certainly don't have the dramatic changes in volume. Ultimately I have found speakers of almost every category of operation perform well on something; but for my preferred listening its image and speed first.