Ron, thank you for this fascinating report. It is well written and very descriptive. What a great opportunity you and Tinka had. I am particularly interested in, and a bit surprised by, the section which I quote above. Why do you think that David's system sounded so convincing on well-recorded jazz and classical music but not on your beloved pop recordings? Is it simply unexceptional recording quality? You have used these same recordings as references during your travels to audition the gear that you will buy to assemble your future system, most notably, your speakers. Has this experience effected your thoughts about your personal reference LPs?
This leads me to wonder about a more general observation: Can a system be optimized for all music and formats, or is it more likely that a system excels, or is tailor designed, to sound best with certain types of music or a specific source format? I have thought of David's system as being one of the few on WBF that would seem to have few, if any, sonic limitations.
Nothing to do with the system Peter 70's & 80's pop is already problematic but the so called audiophile pressings are often the pits! It's this type of audiophile pressings that I've always found unlistenable on any natural sounding system. In contrast Jeff Buckley's LP, a standard commercial pressing sounded fantastic. I have the Warnes album on CD and it doesn't sound anywhere as bad as Ron's LP did. In case of MoFi there isn't a single pressing that I ever found listenable with only the odd Sheffield one, I have most of them!
david