SQ vs. Music


What percentage of the time do you you listen to your set JUST for the SQ and what percentage do you listen to your set JUST for the music? 
I know the obvious answer is you do both, but can you honestly answer the question?
128x128rvpiano
I in fact agree with everyone. Sound quality is extremely important. 
With instruments as well. An example. My guitar playing skill is very rudimentary. Once I was given a custom acoustic classical guitar just to try it. I played a few accords and was stunned by the way it sounded. Incredible, even with my good for almost nothing technique. I could play it for hours, anything no matter how primitive, and would still enjoy it. Had to give it back to the owner, too bad.
Most of the recordings that I listen to are average and below average. This annoys me greatly. Better equipment improves it to a degree but still. Well, not much can be done. Unless I start mostly listening what I don't like much but which was recorded well. I won't. I listen to what I like.
When hearing music becomes transcendent the question becomes moot. When listening at a concert it's the music except for distractions, among them poor SQ having some effect generally briefly, the same with superb SQ unless it leads to hearing. From home the same, except when the poor SQ is system related, then generally longer.
If I didn’t really care about the SQ and only cared about the music, I’d be content with my crappy computer speakers. I surely wouldn’t spend as much money on gear as I do. I do look to be dazzled by the SQ. At the same time, I turn off a song if I don’t like it no matter how good the SQ is. I will put up with lousy SQ on my computer speakers if I like the music. But who wants to listen to a song they don’t like regardless of how great the SQ is?
Oh, tough one, sort of. Being a musician I tend to hear differently. Different things stick out, different things are less noticed. Being a drummer the rhythm is what hits me, lyrical content, hardly ever. So what I hear is very important to what I enjoy. However, I would say it is ultimately about the music. I like all of the relatively few albums I own, and all were very specially purchased. But, I usually grab the ones that SOUND the best overall. So both for me...
As I am still getting my new system up to it’s potential, it’s about 90% sound quality, now.
The goal is to switch that over to much more music listening.
But for me, the hobby of being an audiophile means taking an active role in making my system sound good, testing it for differences, adjusting it to see what happens. Part of the fun of being an audiophile is that experimental activity.

And a huge part of what’s been of value in listening for SQ is, as Millercarbon says, that I am learning how to listen. That feeds back BOTH into (a) listening for SQ and (b) listening to music. Without listening for SQ at least some of the time, I stop learning how to listen better.

In other words, listening for sound quality is a permanent and legitimate part of what I am doing. The percent of how much I’ll do either remains TBD, but the idea that this hobby is "just about the music" is laughable, for me. I love sound, I love experimenting, and so the music is never going to be the only goal.

That said, I understand why it could be a worry that one is not listening to *enough* music. The "grass could always be greener" compulsion can be like quicksand, and the question of how to avoid it is a very personal, psychological question that reaches deeper into our drives and needs than can be answered by questions bracketed at the level of audio.