Negative feedback Amp=more faithful reproduction?


Negative feedback (NFB) vs zero negative feedback (ZNFB). There seems to be unsubstantiated contention that ZNFB amps sound more realistic. I know this is an age old debate favoring the ZNFB design, but I think most audiophiles have never bothered to look into this matter and believe the advertisements and proponents of zero NFB design. I have been in that camp until recently. My own experience and research into articles on this matter leads to me believe NFB is needed for faithful reproduction of music. I'm not saying NFB design is more "musical", which is a highly subjective term and usually means more euphonic or colored. I've posted a similar question awhile back, but I was hoping we can have a more evidence based discussion on this matter. Perhaps, we need clarification of descriptive terms we use to describe sound. My contention is, in general, NFB designs produces a more accurate or faithful reproduction of music than ZNFB designs. Here is a very good article on feedback and distortion:

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/distortion+fb.htm
dracule1
Mapman, Woofers have only one invention - lack of suspension (spiderweb) compensated by large diameter voice coil mounted to flat disc in place of dustcap. It makes membranes lighter, faster and stiffer. Midrange (6.5") uses, in addition ferrofluid as a suspension. Midrange is absolutely breath taking. Tweeter is so well integrated that I cannot really tell transition from midrange.

http://hyperionsound.com/Images/HPS-938%20review.pdf
I'm happy to see Atmasphere has joined the party. Perhaps information less subjective is in the future of this thread.
Atmasphere, It make little sense to seek very high DF for better damping (assuming that speaker needs it) when inductor in series with the woofer has most likely resistance of 0.1 ohm limiting DF to 80 even with perfect amplifier.