Eeyore wrote:

What I mean there is the accuracy with which the sound of a similar acoustic instrument is
reproduced accurately. Clearly no acoustic instrument will exactly match the precise timbre
of the synthesiser itself but it'll give you a good clue.


One can certainly use their aural memory to determine a reasonable
level of realism but not accuracy. An example. I have two versions of
John Renbourn's Lady and the Unicorn. Two different masterings. The
sound of the instruments on both are startlingly realistic yet the
timbre is distinctly different between the two masterings. I can't tell
you which one is accurate but I can tell you which one sounds better.
But as for pure realism they are pretty close.


What's wrong with multiway speakers or crossovers ?

A good electronic crossover ( often in DSP these days ) will provide such precise
band-to-band matching that you can end up with something that's truly quite like a single
idealised FR speaker !


Can you cite any examples of such a beast. I must say I hear plenty
wrong with multi-driver speakers having lived with Martin Logan CLSs
and Sound Lab A3s.



And I think you're simply obsessed with 'glowing bottles'. I doubt you've ever heard a
professional monitoring system for example and you might even hate it for its accuracy !


I have heard a few. The good ones were quite good.




I also really don't care that you know 'an electronics bloke' who thinks the sun shines out
of you arse. I've been doing pro-audio for 33 yrs. I don't need any 'bloke' to validate my
gear.


Are you suggesting that this gives you more authority?



Scott