Trade offs?


As I have improved my system the quality of the CD recordings has become more and more obvious; unfortunately poor quality and harsh sounding discs seem to bother me more as the reproduction becomes clearer.
Having recently started using Ultrabit Platinum I find it sustantially improves the sound of better recordings but also reveals the harsness in poor recordings.
This all gets me wondering,on this quiet Sunday morning, if perhaps I'm reaching the end of the line on further upgrades to my Spectral/MIT based system?
For example will a better CD player simply reveal that the quality of the recordings are already the limiting factor in my enjoyment, better Cd players won't provide more enjoyment?
psacanli
"...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!
Post removed 
musicality means accuracy of timbre. an oboe sounds just like an oboe, a tenor does not sound like an alto sax, and of course frequency response is balanced.

it seems obvious to me that if 2 people say: "my stereo system sounds musical", one might disagree with other as to the sound of the "other" stereo system.

what anyone says , in the end, does not matter, as we return to our stereo systems and listen to music.

if each one of us considers his/her stereo system musical, that is all that matters.

as to how so many stereo systems could be considered musical and yet the components within change so much. a stereo systemn can be musical, less musical and more musical, according to the way the term has been used.

"musical" is based upon opinion. let's leave it at that.

as an absoluteist, i think all stereo systems are flawed and not musical, because of errors of timbre.

as for resolution and musicality, from what i surmise of the relativism of terms, i understand how a system can be deemed musical and highly resolving.

it's just words and its all a matter of opinion.

also, it is worth noting that one may be able to fool others, but it is hard to fool one's self.