First, I am not convinced that just because one component has better measurements than another component that it is necessarily a more accurate reproducer of the musical signal. Perhaps this is a deficiency in our ability to measure all the things that matter (for instance, how do we "measure" synergy between components?).
The concept of synergy between components is that the changes imparted by each component compliment each other (in the case of a system where accuracy is key...they cancel each other) Just because we can't identify what the measurable differences between systems that we enjoy differently are, doesn't mean they don't exist. If you listened to a TON of speakers, and came up with your favorite, it would be likely that something reproduced using similar technology(point source vs line source, etc.), and that measured similarly, would also likely be very pleasing to you.
I agree with you that your own satisfaction is the goal...but what I would say is that the best starting point to find what that is, is from as neutral as possible. you can then add or subtract from there to find what suits your taste. I do, however, think it's akin to saying, "I don't like the coloring of that painting" and then putting on rose-colored glasses so that it looks better to you. If that's what makes you happy, that's fine...but I don't think anyone would agree that the rose colored lens should be put over the painting. Neutral is the benchmark, from which all tastes vary.
Second, I have many recordings of great music by the original artists that just weren't recorded with audiophile quality. These recordings can sound great on some systems, but if the system is too detailed and "accurate" (as my Logan system is) they can sound like crap. Do I just trash all this great music because I only want to listen to "accurate" reproduction and this music sounds crappy when accurately reproduced? Of course not. What I personally want to listen to is great music that sounds great to my ears (whether or not it is technically an accurate reproduction). With well-recorded material, accuracy in reproduction is a fine goal. But with a lot of music, a less accurate but more musical sounding reproduction is called for.
Again, agreed...especially when you have recordings that have artifacts in a certain range that are not part of the music, but are added in recording/production. By minimizing that frequency range, you do enjoy more of the music...because there's less distracting noise. However, building a system around making bad recordings listenable seems like a bad premise to me. There are plenty of adjustments you can make to do that, after setting up a "neutral" system, to make those recordings more listenable, without sacrificing the quality on better recordings.
Finally, I think "accurate reproduction of the original recording environment" is a myth as far as studio recordings go. Often different parts of a song or album are recorded in different studios, vocals are isolated in a vocal booth, and everything is mixed together by the engineers to achieve a particular sound according to that person's taste and objectives. Everything the mastering engineers do changes that sound slightly from the original performance. In this case you are not trying to reproduce the live event so much as you are trying to reproduce the engineer's conception of that event.
Agreed...you don't want to reproduce the studio sound...cause there really isn't one...but again that's dealing with a subset of music. Reproducing concert calls and venues for live recordings is a big part of the difference for me, between low and high end speakers. Ones that do it poorly, I don't consider to be particularly impressive as transducers. Again, there are things to alter the signature of the sound, once you've found "neutral." For instance...if the recording was made from the back of the hall, and you like sitting nearer to the front, certain system changes can make that effect...but do you want to be stuck with that presentation for everything you listen to?
I am not saying that measurements don't have their place in putting together your system. I am just saying I would always trust my own ears and taste over measurements. If something sounds great to my ears, I would never say to myself that I couldn't live with that because my ears must be lying to me because the measurements tell me that it must not be accurate. When the technical aspects of the system and achieving absolute accuracy take precedence over the beauty and joy and personal enjoyment of listening to the music, something has gone very wrong in my opinion. As Roberto says, trust your ears.
There is a difference between accurate and good. Like in painting again...if you take a bad painting, and copy it exactly, it doesn't make it a good painting. You could possibly improve upon it, even...but what happens when you apply that same technique to a masterpiece? You lose the ability to view that masterpiece for what it is. Having something with the ability to be utterly neutral and transparent, gives you that choice. Having something that isn't, doesn't.
The aim of high end audio, in general, seems to be accurate reproduction, however...else, why would people be so concerned with having 2ch only systems with the fewest numbers of circuits/connections between the source and the speaker? Certainly not because they are looking for additional coloration!
Now I just post more technical stuff to get attention. (It's my form of a tantrum!)
