Should a reference speaker be neutral, or just great sounding?

@kennyc....*L*  And that's about as 'neutral' as they get. ;)

Oh, as for 'natural' sounding speakers....

Which is more 'natural';  the songbird in the backyard tree, or a recording of said bird?  This shouldn't be a hard one to answer....

It is always good to remember, or understand, that objectivity arose out of an attempt to emotionally separate from a purely subjective framework context of all possible representations of reality.

That objectivity exists it 'is' via a purely subjective framework, that objectivity is a subset position of subjectivity.

Where objectivity is a lower or more advanced from of this mental position that all reality is subjective, well... I leave it up to you.

The bigger point is, that objectivity does not exist, that it is a conceptual and mental game, a tool, a viewpoint position only... in an entirely subjective existence. Objectivity, if properly weighted, is a logic tool, the same logic that explains to you that reality is inescapably subjective.

the next domino to fall, might be that: Thought process --- is all you've got. Whatever the heck a you is.

No one really knows what any of it is. People who don't practice a fully extended mental discipline might think they've got their 'hands' on something in this whole objectivity game...but really, no...just...no.

i prefer to buy used save at least 50%+


You will hardly ever find SEAS MTM/ 2 way with Excel drivers for sale used. Those are keepers, 
Sure there are K's of speakers used,,,but is our objective a  good cheap price,,, or  should our goal be <superior> sounding. 
??

We will never hear nor achieve it. Get over it.


No no no, You completely miss my point.
Neutral = the least distortyion/coloring. 
Look B&W are world famous, folks adore B&W, 
My opinions does not count, I really hate all B&W's,. The sound is british and very colored,
Like dark grey, brownish, smoky, hazy,  just way too dense in midrange. which is where 80-90% of our music lies.
Neutarl is The Ideal,, and we seek  as close as we can attain to that goal,, 
Look my new xovers are in the works for the Seas, Lets see what Mundorf does to the Excel. This might be a winning team = higher up Mt Everest. Sure I will not attain that peak,,as i do not have K's of $'s to buy what I know will bring me to that peak,,and thats not my style,, I am not a  materialist, 
Once the xovers  are completed and then its onto the Vishay Zfoil resistors for the Jadis DPL preamp, 
Maybe a  few new resistors for the cayin CD17 Mark1, and I'm done. 
Thats my ideal, and I'd say its a  Class A Reference system, which equals others costing XXXXX as much.
Throwing money at this hobby does not always equate with high fidelity. Lets get that straight now.  and stock components are , nothing more than stock, average parts, In order to raise the bar you have to gut the unit and employ world class parts. 
Upgardes with world class parts,  are critical for superior neutral hi fidelity. 
Your average speaker lab, installs average parts = never will be a  world class speaker.
Lets get that straight now.

This is a great question.  From a purely philosophic perspective, I would agree that you would want a speaker that has a perfectly flat frequency response from 20hz to 20khz and compare deviations in terms of sound profile.  If everyone had this as a baseline and new what this sounded like, reviews would be exponentially more valuable.  

However, even if you found this speaker, it would most likely not behave that way in your room.  Your choice in amplification and source is going to alter its sound profile.  And finally, it may not be to your liking.  Just because something is conceptually ideal, doesn't mean it is your preference.  Additionally, wouldn't use a speaker of that sort to evaluate a 300B SET.  

Philosophically, I get it.  In practice, it might be better to choose a speaker in every BestBuy as your "reference" so that people have a common, mainstream point of comparison.