I suspect everyone reading your post will buy into, "...faithful reproduction of music in its space.."; I do. With that as a first goal, my preference is to achieve it with the simplest system possible. Many, I think, will disagree with that. For some more complexity may be better. I wouldn't consider putting together a surround system or adding a sub; some wouldn't think of limiting themselves to two channels. Because of my musical preferences, I gladly trade off ability to play very loudly and to reach below 30Hz, for excellent imaging, sound stage, and low level detail.

After that, I need your help. I don't understand what you mean by, "... something of a universally individual nature.." Can you rephrase that or offer an example?

Maybe I'm missing something, but when each of us builds the system which presents his favorite music in the way he thinks it sounds best, we've reached the end of what we have in common. Beyond that, we go off in our different merry ways. Vive la difference.

I agree. After all, the "fidelity" in "high fidelity" means "faithful." I suspect there will be disagreement, however, over the question, "faithful to what? At the recent HE show, I was struck with how many systems (including some all-out, 6-figure setups) featured 'round-the-clock electronic music. I am so far out of this loop that I don't even know what its genre name is. It sounded like overhyped disco. I couldn't get one of my tunes in edgewise at the MBL room. I noticed some such demos even had flashing lights. What is this faithful to? Yet, it certainly is a popular genre, and 30 years of studying literary and musical types with academic rigor have taught me one important lesson -- there is no defense for asserting the inherent superiority of one type over another in any art form. If you like it, it's as good as Haydn, Mahler, and Bach are to me. So, in the broader sense, I think just about all of us want "faithfulness to music in space" as an audiophile goal, no matter how you define "music." With me, it's the sound of a live musical event...acoustic, not electronic. And that means Jazz or so-called "classical." My priority is music written for the full symphony orchestra, because if a system can do that well, it can do the smaller scale ensembles, too. The reverse is not true, at least not in my experience. Jazz seems to be the meeting ground here at the forum, from what I gather. Various pop and electronic genres lie at one extreme, and classical lies at the other, but everyone here seems to enjoy jazz. Cheers, Clifton

Jazz, as you point out, does seem to be the lure that calls out the largest number of participants and the most vigorous arguments. I'm not sure why that should be. I turned in a bit early last night and switched on the little Tivoli Model 1. Put down a crossword because I couldn't resist listening to the last half of Mahler's 4th played through a single 2 1/2" speaker. Clearly, that equipment didn't do justice to the orchestra or the vocalist, but it was great listening. Sometimes the equipment doesn't matter that much, but the music always does.

Your argument that a full range system which can handle the demands of a major orchestral work will also reproduce chamber music and jazz very well is generally correct. Wasn't it you, though, who said he preferred the sound of his relatively modest Triangle system to his cost-no-object full range system?

That the music matters.

Wow, some of my favorite forum members have really laid a great foundation for this topic. So, I'll just agree and add a couple things that are probably most important to me:

1) I want a system that communicates the message of the musical piece, I want to be able to sit in my listening chair and say, "Damn, I get it!"

I agree with Cheapskate a great deal already, but I, too, am willing to forgo a little stentorian bass or ultimate dynamic range if a system can keep that line of communication between the artist and listener alive.

2) I want a system that doesn't call attention to itself. I don't want to "listen to what that speaker is doing!" I want a system that gets out of the way, that creates a listening environment, not to put on its own performance.

Even the most modest of systems can do this with good set up. That's the beauty of this hobby. The most humble system can sing and remind me how great life is and how lucky I am to hear this beautiful piece of music.

I guess I want a system that will allow me to approach it as superficially or attentively as I feel on a given day. I'll also settle on the side of a slightly reticent system rather than an "in your face" sound.

So...

3) I want a system that's an easy companion. Whatever it does, I want it to do it without being a demanding mistress. I'm hear to listen to music, not to participate in some arcane ritual.

Best wishes to y'all today!

How about that for a great turn of phrase, "...a system that's an easy companion." You've got it right. Must be that desert air. Good show, Buddha.

I think we could all agree upon the fact that this was a great year for audio. To find Mickey dropping some serious green on a TT that really topped his Simon Yorke is not to be taken lightly, plus the fact that more and more vinyl playback items seem to stream out like a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. Who would have bet real money this would be taking place as it has.

Halcro and others continue to nearly make distortion a thing of the past and get you more "there" than anyone thought possible. CD player manufacturers like Ayre, Musical Fidelity, Classe', Rega, Marantz, Naim, and dCS to name only a few continue to take the cd redbook format to even greater heights and SACD continues inspite of no little support by its parents.

It also seems like this has been a great year for speakers around the $1K a pair category, either floorstanding or bookself, and that those of us who do want to hear more can do so without breaking the bank. Even Quad gets into the act with updates of their great designs and takes advantage of China manufacturing to keep them affordable. The fact the Klipsch brought back the Classic line tells us that where we have been was not that bad in the first place.

And, with the likes of Sonos and Slim Devises for those who just want fast access to their music from just about anywhere in any format..the future is now.

As I look back on the Editor's Choices I am amazed at how this passion continues to grow as a business and how diverse the wants and needs of audio listeners has become. This is a great time to be an audiophile no matter what your taste or the size of your wallet. Great sound easily retrieved has never been more affordable.

Can it be possible that anyone can make a new TT that would make Mikey part with his Continuum? That would be something for 2007.

I would also wish for something to take place to help JA reduce all the gear he carries in his "minimalist" LOL recording rig. No matter what he does it will be spectacular and part of the reason we never seem to be satisfied with what we own "now".

To say the glass is more than half full is a understatement!

Jim, if you can beg, borrow, or steal, a copy of Supraphon 50433 you just may be able to break JA of his complexity habit. It's a great demonstration of what can be done with a good hall, 2 microphones, and a simple 2 channel recorder. Once you get to the point where you listen past the tape hiss (they didn't use any noise reduction), you get to hear one of the most involving records that I have ever owned. BTW, it Dvorak's 9th played by the Czech Philharmonic with Karel Ancerl directing.

As for what I look for in Audio, it's very simple. I want a system that does everything well because I have a very wide ranging interest in music. Basically I want a system that sounds as good playing Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor as it does playing Simon and Garfunkel. So I guess that I am someone who needs a "generic" hi fi system, as long as the definition for "generic" is being the opposite of "specialist".

Speaking of "generic", I have one possible reason for the wide ranging interest in Jazz. It's really pretty simple. Jazz is at the root of, or a major influence on, EVERY SINGLE form of popular music for the past 50 years. It just follows that after being exposed to all it's subsidery and influenced forms (Rock, Blues, Hip Hop, Country, Disco, Swing, Big Band, Techno, Gospel, and whatever I forgot) that we could all find a "connection in Jazz.

Scooter,

I agree. It is especially true when I listen to the the SACD reissues of the old RCA Red Seal recordings of which I now own 3. A caring engineer, 2 decent microphones and mic preamps and a good condition R2R is certainly magical.

I hope that John Marks gets to open another "tomb" of mylar and takes us on another trip back in time like he did with "Kind Of Blue". That was special to me. It would be especially fun it it was someone like Tony Bennett who certaily has a vault of music to go over on mylar tape masters. How can he be 80 and still sing like he does?