Best all around speakers

I'm coming to a tentative conclusion that you might have to have some variable in the system in order to happily listen to electric music one moment and a string quartet then next. But I don't think it has to be speakers. I've been pretty happy with Harbeth speakers for the last year or so, used with a subwoofer. (I'm using the Compact 7's with an Essex sub now, but I also like the Monitor 30's.) The variable for me comes from using 2 different CD players and a turntable. One CD player is a bit more forward with more punch (a GNSC-modded Wadia 860), the other is bit laid back and does SACD (EMM CDSA) and the turntable/cartridge is on the somewhat lush side (Linn LP12 with Koestu Black and EAR 834P). Between those different sources, I can usually find something that works.

Agree with Shadhorne completely. I have never heard a speaker that does everything right. Further, I don't believe that there is any such thing as a completely "accurate" speaker. I certainly haven't heard such a speaker, and I think limitations of technology make it impossible. But, hypothetically, even if there were, that doesn't mean you'd necessarily find it entirely satisfying for every listening need. That's because source material is recorded and mastered using all kinds of different-sounding equipment, such that there are all kinds of variabilities in the sound of source material--with an end result being that some source material is going to sound better with speakers of a certain "voice" and other source material will sound better with other types of "voicings". It's all there in interviews with various speaker manufacturers--they tend to start with certain parameters, but ultimately voice based on their ears, and are quite happy to tell you that. And no pair of ears hears quite the same way, or is subject to quite the same tastes of the brains that they're attached to. That's why we have so many different manufacturers of speakers, and so many adherents to one or more of them as being "the best."

Mapman, you're quite right, an awful lot of this is personal preference. I noted my own preference for Harbeths above, but (as also noted), I find that I'm happiest with several diffent sources, each of which has a bit different voice. I guess I've gotten very picky in my dotage, but I haven't found a speaker that gets everything close enough to "right" (for my ear) that I don't feel a need to tinker with what I'm inputting into it.

I hate to think you're right, Mapman, but I can sure think of a number of times after adding a new piece of gear when I've thought "Ah, this is what I needed" and yet a few months later I've figured out that there is this or that problem with the sound that sends me out searching for some and different piece of equipment to "improve" things.

Music to equipment makers' ears...

"A speaker that will not let you hear a bad recording is a poor investment."

It's all a question of degree. I've had systems in my house on which about 10% of the CDs I played sounded great. The rest ranged from tolerable to "run screaming from the room" intolerable. Some would have considered those systems to be wonderfully accurate. From my point of view, they stank. And they're gone from my house, and I am thrilled.

The system I've built now will certainly let me know if I'm dealing with problematic source material. (And I think it is much more appropriate to call it "problem source material" than "a bad recording". What sounds "bad" on one system may well have sounded great to the recording engineer as he was playing it back perhaps as long as 30-40 years ago.) But it is rarely "in your face" about it. I can usually hear the music beyond the sonic problems. That, to me, is a sign of a very well designed system/speakers/whatever.

When I audition equipment at a dealer's, I always take some CDs to play that have problematic sound (in addition to some that sound great on almost anything). That way, I hear the strengths of the equipment, but I am also well aware of whatever fatigue factor exists in the equipment.

A system that is fatiguing to listen to is pretty darn worthless, seems to me. And it is hugely fatiguing to be regularly reminded of all the flaws in the source material you want to hear.

Dcstep - To your question about my digital sources: As I may have reported above, I used multiple digital players in order to deal with differently-engineered sources. My primary source now is an EMM CDSA. I use it for a lot of things, but particularly classical. My secondary source is a GNSC-modified Wadia 860x (a fair bit different sounding than the unmodified version), which I tend to use more for pop and jazz. I also have an EAR Acute with Pope 6dj8's that's fairly forgiving and "analog" sounding. In the past, I was using a Linn CD12, but I thought the EMM and Wadia both bettered it (for my ears). Finally, on the comparison (analog) side, I have a Linn LP12 w/ Koetsu Black through an EAR 834P w/ a Telefunken and 2 Mullards in it.

It's all designed to be relatively mellow--"relatively".

I don't think I have a huge problem with a front-end that can't handle (in one way or another) "difficult" CDs--at least not a problem that a different piece of gear can resolve...but maybe I'm wrong. You have any suggestions?