Bad recordings and high end audio

I’m glad this thread moved to the SQ on good versus bad pressing and CD’s and got off the skills of Jimmy Page as a producer. Jimmy Page produced Led Zeppelin exactly how he and the band wanted Led Zeppelin to sound. If they wanted bottom end boomy bass driven music it would have been there. I prefer to hear the bass notes being played by John Paul Jones.
I am lucky to have very early and very good SQ pressing of the first five albums.
And yes there are songs on any album that I would choose to audition a system and there are songs that I definitely would not choose.
Dyer Maker from Houses of the Holy - definitely not!
No Quarter from Houses of the Holy - absolutely yes!
Whole Lotta Love and The Lemon Song from II - absolutely yes! Although there is not much on Led Zeppelin II that I would not choose!

**** Good recordings will sound better and poor recordings will sound a lot better than they would on a bad system. ****

noromance is exactly right. The comment is particularly true if one considers that the sound of what is a “poor” recording to a listener with audiophile sensibilities or aspirations may be exactly what the artist intended. This goes to one MC’s comments. The artist and/or producer may have a certain sonic aesthetic in mind that he/she feels does service to the music and this aesthetic may be a far cry from the pristine type of sound that we crave as audiophiles. This is particularly true of R&R recordings. Sometimes imperfection and grunge in the sound is exactly what the doctor ordered…music wise. On a related note:

”What do you use to demo equipment, or when attending an audio show?” is a common question. I always make a point to use or bring along recordings of kick as& music that does NOT have “exceptional” audiophile sound. If the gear let’s me hear more of the musical interplay in those recordings without what can become the “distraction” of all the typical audiophillic checking points, then I know I’m on the right track. To the OP:

You write “I have a turntable”. Keep in mind that one of the truest of all audiophile truisms is “garbage in, garbage out”. Any musical information or aesthetic choice that is lost at the source cannot be recovered no matter how good the upstream components. One does not necessarily have to spend the most on the turntable, but only if the turntable/arm/cartridge setup is of, at least, “good” quality can one benefit from exceptional speakers and electronics. If that is not the case, then the exceptional electronics and speakers will only better reveal the problems with the turntable. 

Good luck.

Frogman: I respectfully disagree with your statement of a bad recordings sounding better on a good system vs, a bad system. Good/Great systems reveal just how poorly a a recording was created or how well. Garbage In. Garbage out. Lesser systems don't have the resolving power,  thus colorizing the noise making it sound better...

No problem with disagreement.
However, I suppose it depends on what one considers “better” and what one’s priorities are. If, for a given listener, “better” means being able to hear more of how the recording was mic’ed, mixed, musical interplay among the musicians, and other choices (good or bad) that the artist and producers made, then a better system will ALWAYS, make a recording better. If by “worse” one means poor imaging, uneven tonal balance, sibilance, etc; IOW, the ear candy part of the listening experience, then, sure, that type of sound can be perceived as worse.