I believe there is general agreement in our hobby that fast transients and lack of dynamics are major limiting factors in creating the live music illusion in the home. Reproducing a drum with a live impact is a major challenge to audio systems, and I believe that's why Wilson has been so successful as a speaker company. But before the speaker even gets the signal, electronics are in the way...
I recently compared a couple of very hign end cd players in the same system - the Boulder and the dCS Scarlatti. The dCS sounded more natural in the highs, but Boulder had a very live bass that gave the music an excellent foundation. Boulder guys would be the first to say that they are not adding or subtracting anything from the signal deliberately, but are just passing it along. And so would dCS!
Yet others like Naim add nice pacing and rhythm to the music to make it more engaging, but lack the lively, visceral percussiveness that Boulder has. Why don't more companies engineer that "realness" in the foundation? Is this an engineering limitation or an audiophile taste limitation?
I recently compared a couple of very hign end cd players in the same system - the Boulder and the dCS Scarlatti. The dCS sounded more natural in the highs, but Boulder had a very live bass that gave the music an excellent foundation. Boulder guys would be the first to say that they are not adding or subtracting anything from the signal deliberately, but are just passing it along. And so would dCS!
Yet others like Naim add nice pacing and rhythm to the music to make it more engaging, but lack the lively, visceral percussiveness that Boulder has. Why don't more companies engineer that "realness" in the foundation? Is this an engineering limitation or an audiophile taste limitation?