What do you choose first SOUND or MUSIC?

Buddy, listen to what you like. Sometimes the fidelity is important but most of the time, listen to what you enjoy. That's what I do.

Many so called audiophile recordings are musically a pain in the a..hem... ears. Well recorded, but no musical content of lasting value IMO. All more noteable, the exceptions to this rule, of course ! An audiophile, who is a music lover, will by necessity have to listen to music, which is badly recorded from time to time. ( Recent example: Abado's rendering of the Beethoven Symphonies with the BPO on DGG ) This is the main reason, by the way, why I personally find the idea, that a stereo rig should be built up in a way, that it must aproximate a facsimile of the recording venue as closely as possible, a bit questionable. If for example my listening were to be confined to the music on HP's list of best sounding recordings on TAS, I'd probably soon get bored. So I've built up my stereo in a way, to give me a bit of leeway in voicing it one way or another, with the intent, to bring out most of the musical content of the recording I'm listening to, no matter how well or badly it was recorded. Its a tricky undertaking and I feel the prerequisite for it is a good aural memory of all sorts of live music.

Genesis168 above said it well. I go for the music every time. For example, I have a 3 CD set of newly remastered Jerry Lee Lewis CDs that really boogie even though the recordings aren't that great. This CD set has rhythm and is musical. I also agree with Detlof, "audiophile" recordings can be a pain in the, well "ears". To each his own, but for me if it's not musical, it's not worth it. Test tones do have some value though. Cheers. Craig