Originally posted by: NanoStuff
If I understand your definition of tight, it means high resolution. So yes electrostats are about as tight as you can get. The thing here is, you can adjust the sound to your preference, if it's too 'tight', you can 'untighten' it with customization/plugins, you can't make a slowly responsive speaker faster however, it's a physical limitation. I like my audio to be 'reference', that is to properly reproduce source material without adding coloration, which is why I prefer pro audio over home audio. You can put any number of names on a speaker that cannot faithfully reproduce source material. You can call it warm, soft, 'untight', 'british sounding', but all of those are really the same thing, a speaker that distorts the input signal.
One day you will get a pair of Duntechs or Tannoys, because they're apparently not too tight for you, I however will one day rid myself of speakers and headphones altogether and get myself an audio input device that surpasses natural hearing itself. This will most likely be a cochlear, cochlear nucleus or auditory nerve implant. They already surpass natural hearing in at least one fundamental aspect, minimum perceivable amplitude differences between two sounds. The cause for this is the bypass of cochlear compression, or the mechanical conduction in the cochlear fluid, and possibly the entire conduction from the tympanic membrane up. Still ways to go, but that's sound quality that can't even be imagined. While I do prefer headphones at the moment, in reality any headphone or speaker to date is a crude air stirring device that could never ever at least match the perception of a real life sound, much less surpass it in objective sound quality. Neither speakers or headphones can or will get much better than what they are today, the only direction left to go is small, internal and non-mechanical. Headphones just happen to be closer to that ideal than speakers I've always considered the idea of 5 or worse, 7 speakers an absurd solution for two ears.