Trade offs?

MrTennis, while your contentions may be logical, they are more an academic argument than applicable to what we're discussing here.

I understand the jargon of sonics to be understood as semantics rather than objective descriptions. Therefore, musical means the ability to enjoy music rather than listening to the 'sound' of music.

As far as resolution relates to musicality, you hit the nail on the head. If a stereo system is highly resolving it can't always sound musical. 'Can't always' is the critical element, yes, too many recordings aren't inherently musical, ie. can never sound musical. As for many other, or perhaps most recordings, they can sound musical on a highly resolving system, they have some amount of inherent musical quality.

I doubt any system can always sound musical. You contend some recordings have no inherent musical qualities, any system that could make these somehow musical would be capable of performing magic. Colorations of a less resolute system would only add further color to amusical recordings, certainly not make them musical.

A system that is both musical and highly resolving allows one to enjoy the maximum number of cds within one's collection. Extracting maximum musical enjoyment, along with maximum information is the goal many of us are seeking. I'm not sure that adhesion to some perfectionist and objectivist ideal is what many of us are after, as you say, way too many variables to drive that delusion.

"...some recordings have no inherent musical qualities...."

Comedy recordings I suppose?

words lose their meaning when they are too inclusive.

the idea that one can enjoy music when listening to a highly resolving stereo system does not imply that the sound of that stereo system is musical, or is accurate with respect to timbre.

if the criteria for musicality is "i can enjoy listening to music", almost any stereo system will be acceptable, especially to its owner.

the word "musical", as has been used on these forums no longer means accuracy of timbre. in fact, many recordings are not musical.

calling an apple an orange does not suddenly transform the orange into an apple.

perfection is not the issue. the issue is the meaning of words. it may feel good to use the words resolution and musical in the same sentence, but the word musical in that context is watered down.

It seems musicality is only your perogitive to define for yourself. In looking up the definition of musicality I find there are so many meanings that it is mostly undefinable. Rather it is a feeling, thus, a semantic and/or subjective term.

It is perfectly fine to use the term musical as it is so often understood in these forums. It seems to get across the point quite effectively, most people seem to get it. Now, whether it meets your definition of musical is another issue entirely.

And if it doesn't meet your defintion, please tell us what term or terms you would use to define this feeling?

I also doubt "almost any stereo will be acceptable" in regard to this meaning of musicality is widespread. Look at all the system changes always being undertaken, something must be less than acceptable in order for so many to be undertaking so many changes.

In the end, some words simply have no agreed upon, universal meaning, we all do the best we can in using less than perfect language. How I long for a world in which all words have some perfect meaning, just think how much less confusion and conflict there would be!

And yes, I still contend, as do others, that this feeling of a system being musical and maximum resolution are not inherently exclusive, we feel music and hear resolution at the same time, quite an achievement!