How to meaningfully audition speakers??

Indeed a great question posed by Charles. Inquiring minds want to know! Please Frogman, what are your thoughts, if not here then on another thread. My guess is that like rock musicians, some do and some really don't care, maybe more thoughtful consideration by the sound engineers on jazz recordings than those in rock/pop? I would think that there are much fewer jazz recording engineers than those in the rock/pop genre so there would be more variation in sound quality.

Go for it Frogman. It's a free country and I don't own this thread. I'd like to read your thoughts too. :-)

And ... , Charles1dad's Q is not really so far off point because it indirectly touches on a related aspect of speaker selection. That is the availability of good source material which relates to Chares1dad's recording/engineering quality Q.

After-all, why spend a fortune on any piece of equipment if the availability of source material is limited. Just read all the threads which touch on the benefits and limitations of this or that music media, e.g., vinyl, redbook CD, SACD, streaming digital and so forth.

Seems to me the real starting point is how good a job do recording engineers and artists do in producing good music. Forget what comes downstream. Garbage in -- garbage out. :-')

P.S. apologies if any typos. Had eye surgery yesterday and my vision is still limited. Fortunately, my hearing is ok and I'm enjoying a great redbook CD recording of the 1812 Overture. Reminds me of when I was a kid and my Mom served me and my brothers Quaker Oats Puffed Wheat for breakfast. :-)

Hi Bifwynne,
I appreciate your generous attitude, recording quality has been a persistent mystery to me. Why are there such wide fluctuations in the sound of recordings amongst engineers (there seems to be no established standard). Why do recordings done 40-50 + years ago sound as good or better than many current examples(did the engineers actually listen more in those days?)? It's as if the method of recording has regressed (even classical music in some cases) and this is contrary to most technology endeavors. Jazz really seems the genre that has remained the most consistent in recording quality over the decades.

I'm certain Frogman, Wolf or Learsfool could shed some light on this strange phenomenon.
Charles,

I have no experience, first hand or anecdotal, in recording studios but I can see certain types of individuals gravitate to certain fields and endeavors and bring with them their disciplines. These disciplines may seem or appear to be stereotypical and not true as a whole but they do serve as a basis.

Type casting is a no-no as there are always exceptions to the rule: long haired rockers who always use 11; studious geeks who defer to exactitude; free thinkers who tend to experiment.

I'd love to hear what the pros say as well and shed some light on why they think certain genres of CDs sound better and those who broke the mold or went against the grain to get the best sound they could.

All the best,
Nonoise

Is Walter Becker's (Steely Dan bass, guitar, writer) latest solo CD rock? Because I think it's sonically astounding, and perhaps a reference of sorts. Modern pop music producers might insist on high gain compressed sound because they think that's what people want, and that approach is controversial but shows up all over the place. Hippity Hop/Rap and Norwegian Death Metal don't cater to audiophiles anyway, nor do Miley Cyrus and any other "modern" pop things, but I have only a vague idea of what that stuff sounds like anyway as life is too short to waste listening to music I don't like. I listen to a lot of modern jazz from Jason Moran and Jon Scofield to Bad Plus, etc., and it is often of reference sound quality...only meaning the producer has caring ears.