Most agreed upon best speaker?

Atmosphere, I find your comments interesting. You may be right.

You certainly are right about the 'golden age' of recording techniques 50 years ago that survived the initial introduction of stereo (ping pong anyone) and ultimately, and unfortunatly I think, grew into excessive multi-miking, spot miking/mixing, etc. There were/are some great recording engineers, just not enuf I think. In this case I'm not sure that the exception proves the rule. At least when I started listening to the RCA's and Merc's I had modest stuff and didn't start to appreciate their sonic 'greatness' until Harry Pearson started pointing it out and I had started to assumble some stuff that let me hear what was actually in the groves.

I was listening to a couple of those original RCA LS's last night on my modest analog system (SP10 II, Oracle TT, Benz Glider, and MMT arm) and the results were excellent. Every bit as good, or better, than quality, contemporaneously recorded, digital over a system addmittedly tuned to flatter digital. BUT, and you knew there was a BUT (or butt, as the case may be) remasters on the RCA .5 series, the Chesky series, the Classic reissues, and some CD's, just didn't rise to that level.

Perhaps wrongly, I assumed that the folks resonsible for re-issues were using equipment to assess the reissues that flattered the reissues and it was equipment contemporaneous to the re-issue process - equipment that was/is not in my possession. Hell it must have sounded good on someone's stuff, I've seen it get many accolades. This suggested to me that, as with my Telarc experience, my supposition had some merit. But I'm often wrong, especially when I extrapolate from personal experience some thing more universal. :-)

The Yamaha NS10's were a great little speaker because it forced engineers to concentrate on ensuring the midrange sounded good. These were a big advance from the Urei and Westlake, Lansing horns used in the 60's.

So I agree with Newbee that there is certainly an effect on the sound based on the monitors used. But given the variety of systems out there it is hard to identify a specific trend.

An NS10 used to get the midrange right followed by bass checks on main monitors and then a final check in the car on the way home has been a pretty succesful approach since the early 80's.

The problem with sloppy bass and recessed mids on many "pleasing" sounding speakers is that far too many errors get through due to masking effects. Elliot Scheiner still uses the NS10 or the latest version (MSP10) as far as I know. (If you think the Eagles and Steely Dan stuff sounds good then you know why)

Lately there has been a move towards more accurate monitors driven by the research by the likes of Dr Floyd Toole - monitors with wide even dispersion that load the room evenly and work in a variety of condition and not just close nearfield. This has eliminated the need for checks on multiple systems and resultyed in speakers that perfrom much more uniformly across different brands.

Part of the problem in the past was one of uneven dispersion meaning that the same speaker could sound completely different depending on the setup/surrounding (especially true with older farfield main monitors horns).

Today some people can even mix on main monitors (often in architecturally acoustically designed spaces) but most people still use nearfield monitors that are less affected by location/surroundings...so things have changed since the old massive Urei horn days when the likes of Led Zeppelin and The Who were blowing up speakers twice a week.

Here is a nice recap.

Shadorne

I have been in and out of studios my entire life. I can't tell you the sheer number of NS10s I have seen over the years in all the major rooms in LA.

Nice thread that brought back good memories.

Bongofury,
Of course, I was not talking about PA systems for arenas but the home.
As for as I know this is a home stereo website.
I stand by my word. I've never heard a stereo system for the home yet come as close to the Helix (as set up by Bill Duddleston at his factory in Springfield,IL) to sounding like real instruments.
The particular case in point follows.
1. Bill Duddleston supports music and has a studio set up at his factory that bands may can come to, set up their equipment and at least practice. This area may have other uses as well, but there is a permanent drum set and other instruments there for musicians to play.
2. A local drummer (with considerable talent) was brought into the recording area and was recorded digitally while playing the resident drum kit.
3. This recording was mixed to the Redbook CD standard for playback on the Helix speaker system via a Cary CD player, Coda preamp, and Coda amplifiers.
4. About a month ago I was able to hear the Helix system replay the recording.
5. For the first time ever, I heard a home stereo system reproduce the sound of a drum kit with all the subtle dynamic shadings, rhythm, and explosivness that a well played drum kit is capable of. The system had "jump" that was scary.
6. I really believe if one was led into the room with the Helix playing, one could easily be fooled into mistaking the reproduction for the real thing.
7. I had the opportunity myself to "bang" on the drum kit in question (I would hesitate to say "play") myself and listen to how the drums filled and resonated throughout the studio room.
8. To my ears, the sounds/"music" I heard from the Helix system came closer to the "Absolute Sound" of the real thing than any other home stereo system I've owned or encountered.
8. I cannot claim that other high dollar speaker systems cannot attain the same level as the Helix, one would be foolish indeed to make such a claim, but as a musician and stereoholic, of over 40 years, I've not heard anything that comes close. (Wouldn't it be fun, to have all the "best of the best" in a shoot out, played in the same room with identicle front end and amps?) What a logistical nightmare!

Poor Pedrillo!!