Recently, there were a lot of talks/analogies of beer over champagne, Porche vs other cars, etc.
One must consider the entire audio chain as a whole, and in the recording - source - cable - transducers - tips - ear - brain, the weakest technical link by far are those limited two-channel recordings, the legacy of 1950-ies.
Think about of it - all the richness of the orchestral instruments, the ambience of the acoustic space is just painfully reduced to so limited two-point recordings with a physically limited treble.
With these severe limitations - it is not at all RX5 vs. 911 analogy, not even Mazda 2 vs. 911 but just a golf cart cheerfully enabled by all the glory of "virtual rendering" to make it feel kind of as close to Porsche, as it can physically be (do picture the golf cart and Porsche together to fully grasp this analogy in as much limitations, as it sounds). So it feels really sad seeing community members delusioning themselves in distinguishing "the stage" and investing in "benchmarks" like those U12t, as a part of this limited virtual golf cart simulation...
One then may ask - why not to make better recordings with all the avaiable multichannel transducers reproducing multiple channels for the much better stage, resolution dynamics, etc?
The painful realistic answer to this question is - if the "audiophile" community is so much stuck/invested in simulations, and especially able to "hear cables" as the most vivid self-delusuons that form an "integral part" of the "simulations" - who would the heck invest in better recordings, if it is just possitble to simply sell $1000+ cables (with some modest cut to reviwers of free samples hyping the heck of it and more) and package different virtual simulations of the golf cart with $5k+ IEMs pretending to feel like Porshe in the virtual reality of ever better "simulations", - the vivid case in point is "legedary" Trifecta....