Boswell, I guess we are alone on this? Of course, great minds think alike and so do the other kinds.
There is such a beautiful blend of harmonics from a piano that would present a much more broad evaluation capability from its program repeatability. I like the idea of that solenoid operated mallet. What you did was sort of equivalent to the early MOOG synthesizer that was not polyphonic. Most people could not remember back that far because they weren't born yet. Everybody takes for granted polyphonic capabilities today. I know I'm getting ear fatigue and so, I don't use monitors that cause me much of that. Some of these newer monitors, no matter how good they are, I have found give me greater ear fatigue. But the marketing hype and the manufacturers will tell you otherwise because they're trying to sell you new product. So only you can determine what's best for you. We sit and monitor for hours on end. And when you need to, you take a break. Then you go back, lather, rinse and repeat. And your hair will look great. All of those hairs in your inner ear. How else do you think that real professional engineers do it? Back in the day, even folks like George Massenburg utilized JBL L 100's which were the prettier looking version of the 4310/4311/4312's and some of us still like those like myself. Sure, I've used plenty of others and like plenty of others like Meyer HD-1's. Some of these newer fangled speakers sound good initially.
Your Henry Ford approach would still not be consistent because you are changing the position of the actual sound source in relationship to the room's acoustic environment. Nodal differences would then negate any consistency. You know some of us aren't really idiots even if I seem to be. Although I'm also quite competent at being a professional idiot when I want to be. It's fun to be idiotic at times. We need a laugh once in a while.
Maybe I should try recording a Model T?
Mx. Remy Ann David