Also agreed. However, who are we to talk about tonal balance, eq or
anything else if we didn't sit in on the sessions and speak to the
artist and engineers? Maybe they did it for a reason ("it's the
ambiance, I'm telling you." "But it sucks!" "So... it's *my* ART!!!"
hah hah) I know I'm being a little empirical here, but the reality is
that when we buy a recording, we're buying what's on the CD. If you
choose to tweek it, so be it. That doesn't change the validity of
accurately reproducing what is on the CD...

Well, that is assuming what we're listening to came from a CD. In this day
and age, this is not necessarily true. Also, the case for many bands,
particularly those signed to a major deal, is that the recording is NOT
their art - rather it's the record company's art. Startup bands do what
they're told. And even if it is their art, who's to say that the right
level of EQing won't give YOU the listener the better experience, much like
the effects of lighting on visual art. And finally, we all have different
preferences in sound. There's not only a brain factor involved - there's an
ear factor as well!

The basic fundamental FACT is that EQing is one way to tailor the sound to
OUR preferences. Screw flat.