Quote Originally Posted by Jochem
Of course, what recordings you like and how much is going to vary depending on which speakers you are listening to.

yes! I'm afraid I have te re-evaluate my collection
some jazz they do wonderful
some classical cd's that I thought were good recordings, suddenly show flaws
some songs of Queensryche, which I liked on my old B&W DM110i's, sound pretty awful
Actually I find most music is recorded quite well - which doesn't mean they're anywhere near as good as excellent recordings - a lot of speakers make a lot of recordings sound bad when the recording is perfectly fine. When it sounds bad the recroding is automatically blamed and the speaker is said to be revealing fo flaws in the disc or in the upstream equipment - I used to believe this exact same thing - but a funny thing happened at the audio shop one day. For this theory to hold water then it would imply that the more "revelaling" speaker would or should also bring out the best in the best recordings - and if a speaker that doesn't make a given recording sound horrible then it must be deemed as "forgiving" or rolled off in the highs and or lows. The problem with that is that it would also ruin really well recorded albums bringing them down a few pegs making it worse than the revealing speaker.

I have very well recorded albums like Leahy: Lakefield which is a busy disc of Fiddle dance music from Eastern Canada. This album has been brutal on most speakers. A recording I thought of as terrible was Amanda Marshal's first album - not so - it is a very well reocrded album. One review magazine gave Dianna Krall's latest cd an average recordiing rating - not so it is very well recorded front to back - miced a bit back. Most recordings are average to better - few are bad that I own. I am very leary on buying a speaker that would turn 80% of my music into unlistenable dregs and force me to only be able to listen to Patricia Barber's Cafe Blue - which isn't as well recorded as some think.

This has zero to do with your speakers but the notion that when music sounds lousy right away the recording is blamed. I personally would rather own a stereo system that i can listen to any disc in my collection and show off to other people ANY disc in my collection without fear that I need to only select discs or tracks that sound right. Chances are if this is what you're doing the blame is hardly all of those recording engineers incompetance and deafness. This isn't to say some sound thin or bright - but I have a number of discs that will separate the boys from the men - Leahy is a decent one - Amanda Marchal's is another where the sound is thin and brittle - Jesse Cook's Tempest or almost anything of the unamoplified acoustic instrument variety - classical music - older recordings sound honky or blaring on bad speakers/systems or thin. Then on what are considered good recordings the speakers usually perform a lot better - but then the speaker which supposedly softens up the bad recoprding seem to also wow the hell out of you on those considered good recordings.

Speaker positioning is huge in order to fix up the sound of a speaker - and amplification/source have to be at least respectable - and a good match - as is your taste - but mate DO NOT change your taste in music(how can you) to suit the speaker. This makes no sense - you're basically then buying gear for the gear's sake and not to serve the music YOU LOVE. This IMO is not the point of a stereo system - the point of a stereo system is to make the music you already love brought up a level so that you love it even more. Even if that means buying a speaker with more personality or even one with a midbass hump. A lot of the 70's rock discs I have (I don't have a lot truthfully) tend to sound a bit thin so the last speaker I would want is one that is a bit thin sounding - If this was a big part of what I played i would want a speaker that is a bit fatter or even resembling the west coast sound - I would sacrifice the currnt notion of accuracy and take a little splash of tubby so that that those recording sound more rich - like buying a Starbaucks Bold Sumatra versus Folgers breakfast Light. Or a thick Port versus a dry Red. The B&W's of old like the Matrix series had much to be desired and B&W threw some of that GOOD away when they made the Nautilus series. Yes the Nautilus has improved some technical areas - but they threw out some of the musical value they had gotten right and now the Nautilus while a technically very good speaker - sounds technical or artifical. It's tough to place as to what exactly isn't up to snuff. Still a great line mind you - but IMO not an improvement musically.

Do not feel like you have to keep them - most any dealer will take them back and let you move to a competitor they carry - To me there is a difference between a bright speaker and one that is extended. If I notice detail as detail I get nervous about it's ability to realistically get the content off the disc without adding artifacts. The fact that my ear is even drawn to the tweeter as a separate entity bothers me most of the time. Allow them no more than 10 hours to "break in" - after that 2-3days and after trying different positionings and on unamplified music if there are a lot of your discs that sound in the slightes and I mean slightest bit etchy or hard - at 90-100decibals then to me the speaker needs to go. It will only result in having them gather dust - or being run on short listening sessions because you get a headache. Life is short buy a speaker that makes what you like sound good.