Disturbing "Sonic Trend" showing up on SOTA audio

Thanks for the clarification, Newbee. As I said in my previous post, in a concert hall, you should be able to close your eyes and still listen and be able to tell where different instruments are located on the stage. It may be slightly easier to do this in some places in the hall than others, but honestly I have never thought about this- one should be able to tell that regardless of where one sits in the hall. An inability to do this would say much more about one's ears than the design of the hall, reflections, etc.

I'd like to offer some observations re the pinpoint imaging issue. I don't
mean to take liberties with what Schubert and Learsfool are meaning to
say, and please correct me if I'm wrong; but, I think that there really is no
disagreement. To me, as concerns audio, there is much more to
"imaging" than precise and stable localization; or, at least, there
should be. I think that what Schubert refers to as "pinpoint"
imaging from a stereo system is a distortion of what is heard live due in part
to the absence of information which many of even the "best"
components can't capture/reproduce. This low level information is what
gives music much of its nuance and is part of each instrument's (or voice)
harmonic envelope. Good composers are very conscious of this and
sometimes make orchestration choices with those considerations in mind.
They don't necessarily think of a clarinet sounding completely separate
from the oboe; instead they may consider how the clarinet's harmonic
envelope will blend with the oboe's and create a unique color. This
harmonic envelope is a kind of sonic glue that connects performers in the
performance space, and allows for what players sometimes refer to as
"getting inside each other's sound". In audio the so called, and
coveted, "black spaces" between sonic images can create an
illusion of instrumental separation; however, in live music those spaces are
filled with sonic stuff that gives music complexity, nuance and feeling. As
Learsfool correctly points out the localization is there, but there is also
much more information in the spaces between the instruments which can
create the illusion of less pinpoint imaging.

Frogman, thats exactly what I meant and lacking your knowledge did not say so.

If you do not know what a coherent sound sounds like you are unlikely to buy a coherent speaker .

Practically, it doesn't really matter what pinpoint imaging or anything really sounds like. Only what each person thinks things sound like. Its all in the ears and mind. Live or Memorex. One chooses to be satisfied or not for reasons that only matter to them.

Of course nobody ever accused an audiophile of being practical. Or satisfied, for that matter.

I guess what I am trying to say is if there is a "Disturbing "Sonic Trend" showing up on SOTA audio " then its the observers problem since they are the one disturbed.

It may be BS or something concrete. If enough people buy into it, there is probably something to it. Otherwise it is most likely expensive BS.

"Exaggerated high frequencies and etch = "details"

Biting unnatural attacks = "fast transient response"

Unnaturally dry bass = "taut" and “tight”"

I have no problem with details, fast transient response and taught or tight bass. Others might disagree certainly.