So if you were to hear an even better system, the Rossini setup you heard would then be a distortion, but it currently isn't? Or was the Rossini setup the absolute best and utterly realistic sounding that you guys have ever heard??? In your threads you described no shortcomings of any kind with that setup, or did I miss something.
Ack, Speaking only for myself, the Rossini setup that day at Goodwins, was the best DIGITAL replay that I have experienced to date. It still sounded different from the best analog set ups that I have heard, though that statement is qualified by the fact that the respective systems were different and in different rooms.
I just reread my posts in the Rossini thread and I did in fact mention some shortcomings. I posted a number of times in the first few pages of that thread. I discussed the lack of Presence in particular in that system on that day. I chose instead to focus on the positive attributes of the sound, many the high degree of information retrieval from the source, ie resolution, and also the high degree of natural sound. I attribute the lack of Presence to the room and set up, but it could also have been for some other reason like electronics or cables. That is why a home audition is so valuable, as you found out.
I also wrote that I thought the Magico Q1/Spectral integrated amp/MIT cable system was extremely transparent and demonstrated very clearly, to me at least, the sonic differences between the Rossini and Berkeley Ref DAC. We did not spend much time listening to the Spectral player in the system, but did hear a few of the same CD cuts on that one too. The audition of the Spectral was brief so I chose to write about the Rossini and Berkeley in my report.