Should the best systems sound almost identical?

Dekay:

"To understand what the "original/perfect" recorded/intended sound is you would have to use the original sound engineers brain and ears (probably while listening to the music through a variety of crappy sounding speakers used in the "original" studio, as well)."

Agree that the sound engineering process and equipment is part of the entire package and a contributing factor to why audio system will never be able to perfectly reproduce an original sound.

All:
If you're familiar with Regina Carter, she's a jazz violin player that had the opportunity to perform a concert and record a CD using Paganini's own violin. When she returned to her, I'm sure very nice, violin she described it sounding like a mouse in comparison. I've only heard that violin on her recording but plan to purchase another CD using that violin in the future to see how much of the wonderful sound comes from Regina's style and how much is the violin. The sound that I would describe from the instrument is that it has an almost cello sound in the lower register that is more full than other violins.

Here's an analogy that seems to make sense to me. Have you seen Top Chef, Master Chef, or Hell's Kitchen? From time to time the chefs are asked to reproduce a dish based on taste alone. The obvious goal is to recreate the exact dish, but I've not yet seen anyone do it perfectly. The interesting fact, that I had not really thought about until this discussion, is that the judges are trying to choose the best match, but it's almost certain that their person tastes will be a factor in which one taste "better" because they are more sensitive to a particular flavor. This is similar to audio because it's virtually impossible to recreate the original, but it's still possible to prefer the recreation more than the original.

Imagine going into a hospital to get a CAT scan or MRI and the tech says that the machine isn't designed to give accurate image, but one that makes everything look kind of good. When compared to pro audio, high end equipment manufacturers go for the good sounding rather than accurate. That's the primary reason really expensive systems do not sound identical. But then again, audio equipment is not FDA approved for medical diagnosis.

i think that as has been stated before, there are two camps. one tries to minimize errors to the signal, the other tries to satisfies one's taste/preferences, or whatever word (subjective) you choose to select.

the former stereo systems as a group would tend to veer towards the neutral, while the latter would vary all over the place.

so, it's a matter of what your idea is as to the purpose of a stereo system. there is no definitive answer. there is no write or wrong.

this issue has plagued serious listeners for years. it is a philosophical issue and will be argued forever.

rehgardless of the approach what is considered "best" in stereo systems will present audible differences.

Mceljo:

It would seem that you may not understand my post, as your response does not make any sense in regard to what I posted (what I posted was clearly stated, IMO).

Simply put, there is no achievable "true to the source" documentation/measurement as to what the original ears/brains involved in the musical production listened to.

Dekay:

I may have misunderstood, but it appears that you're talking about the recording process and I'm simply talking about the reproduction of an original sound.

You are correct that we'll never be able to really know what the original sound was on any given CD.