Trade offs?

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!

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.

I think if you play an instrument, musicality's meaning is quite clear and if given, a high compliment indeed. It's not very difficult to play every note correctly with correct tempo, following the dynamics and have a piece not sound musical. I wouldn't say the timbre and its accuracy is the defintion of musical. It wouldn't be right to describe it that way, since you're listening to the live instrument. Yet one can easily hear musicality or not. Muscicality is simply getting the music out of a piece.

Wireless200, I'm with you on that; and luckily, lots of 'musicality' comes through most stereo systems. Many of us Audiogoners are just into refining the playback quality for ever increasing our enjoyment and feel of the music.