Should a high end system be flexible, or demanding?


This is a discussion we dance around here a lot. I want a system that is flexible. That lets me play music from Sister Rosetta Tharpe in the 1940s all the way up to today and enjoy it.  I simply can't expect mono recordings from then to sound the same on my system as they did to the recording engineers at the time, nor can I make a 1940's "reference system" work well for modern tracks.

Making a system that is too demanding that keeps you looking for audiophile approved recordings while ignoring music as culture for the past 100 years is a kink.
erik_squires

Showing 4 responses by mapman

I often use the phrase “in the same league”to describe a system that can compete with another. High end is essentially the big league. 


Some systems are Dodgers, well financed and capable of winning more but not all contests. Others are Orioles, then everything in between.

That’s for comparing things on some absolute scale which really does not exist for home music systems.

Then there is that everybody has their favorite team. Could be any of those teams in the big league. We tend to call those people “audiophiles”.

A system either works well or it doesn’t to meet a users needs. That is the main thing.
Another thing is that people may not even be aware of how variable recordings are and think their system is the solution to make recording X sound the way they want it to, not how it actually is. Then one is stuck on the upgrade merry go round getting nowhere trying to make things into something that you want it to be but in fact is not.