Accurate vs Musical

The way I understand musicality is that it also means the emotion of a musical composition that is conveyed to a listener. Be it by a musician, orchestra or a stereo system. Accurate system reproduces not only timbre, pitch and harmonics, but should also convey emotions.
If a certain set up makes you fall asleep, this system could be anything - accurate, musical. What it can also mean is that the recording you were listening to was a lousy performance, unworthy of any attention or the listener could simply be indifferent to the composition.

Given a proper recording and an appropriate performance, a musical set up should grab you, put you on the edge of your seat. Listening to an unfamiliar piece, it should make you wonder what's next.

So in my opinion, musical is also accurate.

Now accurate system can also be hard to listen to if the source recording is of poor quality. This is where the challenge is to strike a balance between accuracy, musicality and your level of tollerance of a particular set up.

As far as musicians, there are ones who are accurate and musical at the same time. There are others who are just accurate. Example of accuracy and musicality would be Heifetz, Oistrakh, Jacqueline duPre, Rostropovich. Example of accuary with much lesser degree of musicality if an above mentioned Yo-Yo Ma(great technique, but most of the time lacking in emotion in comparison to some of the greats).

Just my opinion. The way I see it and hear it.

hi paul:

musical has nothing to do with euphonic. musical contains the word music ? what is music ? pitch, timbre and harmonics. the issue of distortion is a non issue.

when you listen to a live performance you hear the sound of instruments. most stereo systems misrepresent, to some extent, the sound of instruments because stereo systems are not perfect and recordings are not perfect.

stereo systems are inaccurate. the distiction you make between so called accurate and musical stereo systems is incorrect. if you consider the definition of the words you will realize that stereo systems are not musical and not accurate. they will represent, inaccurately, the sound of an instrument, to some degree, which cannot be measured.

some hobbyists will attempt to "adjust" their stereo systems to sound more like instruments, while others will try to minimize inaccuracy. both are problematical efforts, because a reference is lacking. the sound of a recording is unknown and most do not have the luxury to record a performance in their listening room and compare the reproduction of the recording with a live performance, which would be an anecdotal approach to assess musicality.

i suspect that so called accurate stereo systems contain inaccuracies of an additive nature, while so called musical systems are inaccurate , subtractively. thus musical and accurate stereo systems will probably sound different, as understood in the connotative ways in which the words are used. but note well again, no stereo system is accurate and no stereo system is musical. it's all a matter of how inaccurate a stereo system is. any ideas on measurement o9f inaccuracy ?

Mrtennis:

some hobbyists will attempt to "adjust" their stereo systems to sound more like instruments, while others will try to minimize inaccuracy. both are problematical efforts, because a reference is lacking. the sound of a recording is unknown

As stated, the premise is correct. However, it presupposes that the objective is the (live) performance.
I don't think that this is a viable -- or correct -- pursuit for sound reproduction.
*For live music we go to a concert.
*To enjoy music, we can also listen to transistor radio, our cell phone, etc.
*A sound reproduction system offers enjoyment through two parametres:
--the actual music
--the system playing the medium on which the music is recorded.

Both variables are at play.

"Accurate", as you present it would indicate "closest to the medium (cd, LP, etc)" AND as you note, we have no real reference to the actual event even through the medium at hand.

So, I would suggest that hobbyists turn to adjusting their systems to "sound closer/more/better/etc" to the instruments.

I listen more to orchestral music and that is what I've (now) turned to.

I used to think that an "excellent" system plays all kinds of music -- i.e. offers the same level of enjoyment playing all kinds of music.
I'm not so sure any more. My system plays classical. I can also adjust it to offer enjoyment playing blues - but it needs an "adjustment.
Cheers

BUMP I expected this thread to live on. I think every audiophile should own both! Speakers are getting very close and it seems the big decider is the listening room and mating it with the right speakers. Imaging is really important to me, any speaker will reproduce the sound of rain or water running down a stream but it's the speaker that images well that gives it shape, pulls you in. Accurate speakers that can't create an image are less involving than a pair of average speakers that can. If you find your speakers tend to favor one type of music to another they may be considered inaccurate though they're musical and involving in the right format. Personally, I'm looking for the holy grail. A speaker thats musical, involving, images well, can go loud and is accurate enough to play ALL types of music. 

"musical" is probably the most overused yet useless descriptor in the audiophile world. It tends to be a stand in for simply "I liked it."

Which is why the phrase I think I dislike most is the ubiquitous "sounds like music" when anyone is reviewing a system. If ever there was a pretentious phrase empty of any real useful content, that’s it.