Live vs Recording

Yes Schubert, I hear you regarding efficient speakers in how they handle dynamics. Not that inefficient speakers can't with enough power but planer/stats sure don't which is their major shortcoming IMHO. That diaphram can only move so much. Aside from tonal accuracy and the ability of a system to resolve spacial cues on the recording, things that make it sound more real, dynamic shadings and range are most important in presenting a convincing illusion closer to what we hear in live music IMHO. So far as a phase inversion switch, which is a nice feature, it doesn't seem to get as much attention as it should among audiophiles. It certainly can make a big difference, at least to me. Some are more sensitive to it than others it seems.

Right you are Tube, I think of planers as amateur singers who don't know how to breathe properly.
Hard to see how anyone could miss the phase bit, on vinyl at least.

Re phase inversion switches: A point that should be kept in mind is that when the setting of the switch is changed not only is the signal being inverted, but the configuration of the circuit that is being used within the component is also being changed. In some designs an active stage might even be inserted or removed as a function of the switch position, with significant sonic consequences.

Perhaps that kind of design dependency is one reason opinions tend to be divided about the efficacy and usefulness of phase inversion switches. In addition, of course, to the differences in approaches to mic'ing and mixing that occur among different recordings, genres, labels, etc.

Regards,
-- Al