I would modify that--high fidelity playback isn't trying to be closer to the performance--that's the microphone and recordist's job. It's trying to be closer to the input signal, whatever that is. And the processing the recordist does may be an effect that is part of the creative process. Or it may be a manipulation demanded by A&R people who think the effect will make it sell better. Or some combination of the two. The processing may be corrective--to overcome defects in the microphone setup. There are a zillion possibilities, with only a half-zillion being negative (and just try getting audiophiles to agree on which half-zillion represents evil).
Of course, sometimes the input signal sucks and people want the playback system to make it sound good. But building that correction into the system without the option makes those recordings that didn't need it sound worse. But that's okay, because audiophiles will then declare those recordings as being poor and won't play them.
I've been forced to play with various levels of fidelity over the years as I find a reasonable amount of the music I love isn't necessarily recorded well enough to enjoy on a some super-revealing systems, but refuse to let my system dictate what I can listen to. My main rig is very good at walking this fine line between the information being there and no obvious spectral imbalances, but being 'forgiving' (for want of a better description) of less than stellar recordings that I can still really enjoy them. That's a 5.1 system with active DSP speakers and a sub, etc., though, so the amplification is built-in. I'm trying to get a similar kind of sound quality for my passive speaker system in a second room, so hence the need for an amp which walks the same line... Closest I've ever heard was a McIntosh - everything there which I know is on a recording but 'forgiving' enough to sit back and just enjoy the music. But McIntosh are
eye wateringly priced in the U.K.
I don't know how 'transparency' is gauged in subjective terms, simply because unless the listener was present at the recording, I'm not sure what they're using as a baseline for that claim. With all the half-decent amps, speakers and sources I've had over the years, once you've heard a detail in one listening session, on one piece of equipment, you can then go and hear it on the others too, so it seems the information is basically there for the most part. In fact, I'm more wary when a piece of equipment/system sounds dramatically
different to the norm. The most extreme example of this I personally experienced occurred around 20 years ago, when I was a young guy and when to demo some Naim gear. The dealer paired the CD player with a low-end (by Naim standards) amp and some speaker or other that was en-vogue with Naim gear at the time. Well I took along a few CDs and opened with Buena Vista Social Club, which was also one of the recordings everyone used in the day. About 4 bars into El Cuarto de Tula there's a deep drum which is struck at the beginning of each phrase. Every system upon which I've ever heard that recording, to this day, presents the drum as a fairly softly struck "boooom" sound. On that Naim system, that day, it went BLAM! right through the seat of your pants. It was electric. I'm almost sure it's wildly inaccurate - in comparison to equipment I believe to be pretty balanced, I think the Naim system was actually bass-light and quite 'edgy' which subjectively made it sound very fast and rhythmic. I think I'd have had severe listening fatigue within a few hours of owning it (I bought something else in the end) but to this day I miss it every time I listen to that track and am always disappointed even though I know it likely wasn't recorded that way. Who knows, though, since I wasn't there at the session - maybe the Naim was right and every other piece of equipment I've listened on is wrong.
Ideally, it would be nice to have a system revealing enough for the very good recordings, which would be sublime on it, but be able to store custom EQ for those which aren't. This isn't as easy as you'd think though - a lot of the time, a global frequency tilt won't do it, and neither will general bass/treble cut or boost, you have to try and find specific frequencies to cut/boost - a bit beyond the pale for home use. Other times, most of a recording is well balanced, but they recorded the strings too hot, or the hi-hat, whatever... ultimately I'm not in the studio and just want to listen and not bugger around too much... Another alternative would be to try for a general EQ of a more 'forgiving' system. This, I suppose, might be possible, but I'm not sure it would be completely easy - things such as damping factor, certain THD/IMD at given frequencies, and very slight rounding of square wave response, etc., etc., might not be that obvious to EQ in...?
[Edit: to be fair to the Naim electronics, I believe the speakers also had a decent part to play in this particular sound - can't remember what they were for the life of me, unfortunately!]
