I don't listen to much stuff that 'should' be subject to the extremes of the loudness wars.
I'm 61, there is plenty of material around that does suit me.
I did get caught out by an Al DiMeola on a Telarc disc, of all things -
http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/8517
On the other hand, here is a new favorite I recently acquired -
http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/84320
(I reported the data for that one)
--
I find with relatively accurate reproduction, the musical content stands out, and the production values are what they are. Very seldom (it does happen) will I consider something (within my range of interest) to be unlistenable.
That happened last week, a friend brought over some old orchestral recordings, I can't even remember who was featured now, and it was just awful. He even returned the disc to the used disc store and traded it for something else.
I'm less interested in the absolute production quality of a disc (better is still better, of course) and more interested in the music itself. Composition comes first, else it just doesn't get to me no matter how well it is done, as a general rule. I'm very interested in playback being as good as can be, which is something under my control, within the restraints of my little room, and my personality, and listening levels (generally somewhat low). I tend to prefer smaller groups, acoustic or electrified, electronic is seldom intriguing. There's no 'touch' in it.
I want a dynamic presentation, and that doesn't mean loud, it means a range of loudness. I seem to settle around 75dB spl (slow) with peaks to 100dB. Loud enough to hear eveything well, not so loud as to be annoying. Essentially I put the range of the CD into the air at the same range of levels. Material subject to the 'loudness war' has to be turned down, it's too loud on average, and then the peaks aren't there anymore, and it sounds 'flat'.
Piano sounds right, guitar and banjo sounds right, voices sound right, drums and percussion sound right, to me. Finally. I don't know where the next level of playback lies, it sure seems close to the limits here now.
I suppose the fewer real-time adjustments the brain has to make when listening to something, the better it 'sounds'. Is that a cause of listener fatigue? Brain working overtime to EQ whats in the air into intelligibility?
Selective EQ? Maybe on some amateur recordings, but I let the professional ones speak for themselves. No lipstick for the pigs.
--
I would consider the Benchmark to be in the 'highly accurate' category, the supporting electronics bring it right up against the limits of what is possible with the DAC chip inside. Measurements at the limits of what is measurable. Minimal defects. Unaffected by source jitter. A reasonable array of features for home use. Highly focused stereo image, excellent separation of the little sounds deep in the mix from the louder ones in the foreground. Nothing gets 'stepped on'. The sonic image is 'unambiguous'. There are others just as good, I'm sure. I just don't know which ones they are. Doesn't matter to me. I'm set for now.
Here's the
manual, it has a lot of measurements.
Here's a
review (and more measurements).
I send digits from all sources to it - so everything takes on the same character (or lack of character?) - TV/Roku/Cable Box/CD/HDRadio/PC Streams whatever.
--
As for comparing equipment - is
this better than
that? - I'm a hermit, don't get out much, don't care. I don't have credentials to parade around, I'm not in the 'industry', I don't do 'ABX', just have a reasonably experienced ear from amateur musician/listener/recording/live sound production/experimentation/composing experiences, and try to make an informed choice when buying something, so I can enjoy my little hobby of listening to the data on little silver discs or in those pesky data packets from the cloud.