if you have high quality recordings and a high quality source, then i respectfull disagree, the ability of the stax to reveal faults is a positive, not a negative quality. imho it just means your components upstream are not up to scratch and the stax are simply making it more obvious
No two tracks are recorded with the same care and attention, and a revealing system will expose that. The uninitiated could however easily condemn his/her equipment for product deficiencies that can in fact trace their roots to the recording studios and their use of the equipment at hand. I remember a classic case of when one of the female singers of TLC refused to use the mics we provided for a video shoot. She had used a similar mic on one of their discs, and the results turned out to be horrible on the finished product. The mic was blamed, not the record producer. Try listening to Nora Jones's 1st CD on the Stax, and in particular #2. The main voice should be slap bang in the middle, with the backing vocals hard left and hard right. It's a lousy producer mix, but vocal separation is spot on. Some systems manage to create a completely different picture that has a wider soundstage that isn't actually on the discs. Now try Nora Jones "It's Not To Late" #2, and listen to the soundstage on that. Miles better, and that's how it was recorded.
If you try those same tracks with a set of electrostatics, open, and closed headphones you get 3 different impressions on the 1st example, but an almost identical impression on the 2nd example.
So searching for Nirvana is not an open and shut case, and no single solution exist. If you ask me, a DAC with 3 different processed outputs could come close to a solution, and I am actually considering doing just that to one of my DACs as an experiment.