As long as audiophiles keep following advice of all these gurus whose disdain for technical performance only brings confusion, the only advancement we'll see is that of ignorance. The ability to drive a long line is only one of many requirements a good preamp should pass. A noise floor below the source's is another. Unlimited slew rate yet another, etc. But the guru says, "This (pre)amp is not musical and has no pace, my foot isn't even tapping...". What is this term? How do you define 'musical'? Is a Sony Walkman unmusical? Audio is already infested by this kind of arbitrary and subjective terms. Problem is, audio is NOT like cooking, or painting, or composing sonatas. Audio is a science (a physics application actually), and therefore is dominated by technical factors.
Cooking, painting and composing have also undeniable technical factors. You will not find a chef ignoring the proportions of ingredients, or a painter not knowing the virtues of brushes and canvases, or a composer ignoring the musical scale or the soloist's physical limits. But technical and objective factors must be subordinated to art, or the outcome will be artificial. Conversely, artistic and subjective factors must not command the design of an audio product, or the result will be... colored and artificial! Even speakers and phono cartridges, which seem to be closer to the art vs. science boundary than purely electronic products, depend heavily on objective parameters, much more than artistic ones.
In conclusion, any thread of this type is interesting, but will never produce a definite answer, simply because everybody has a subjective opinion involving his experience, taste, prejudices and mood. I would not be surprised to find a thousand music lovers claiming their iPOD is the very best audio player in the world, "cost is no object". And they would be right, as far as they are concerned.
Yes, it's a free world, but it's also beginning to sound like anarchy.
Regards,