Music is not an equation and i know you now that...
Sound is no more reducible to an equation.... Then clarity or accuracy means something in a context and in a precise perspective, your musical example which is a musical example not an acoustical one is good...
But life is complex, no lived event will be the same at different location on the original scene of the lived event... Because no audio system can reproduce the original event only translate it and recreating it, the trade-off of the recording engineer are choices which impose a perspective on ALL acoustic cues, timbre perception for exanple...
Then all your applications and requirements about clarity and accuracy are legitimate expression BUT they are only that, applications and requirements in a precise context for some perspective...
No audio system and no hall theater , and no recording technique can REDUCE the complex sums of possible perspectives in the perception of timbre microstructure to only one you can call the clearer one on all aspect save the musician himself listening to himself, but even there, the experience will be dependant of some acoustic factors and from a choice of instrument... And each room / system / ears will interpret clarity and accuracy in the context of some acoustical cues or to another one, because timbre perception is so complex that it cannot be defined in SIMPLE terms with one equation, it is also a psycho-acoustic experience and not only an acoustical one...
Then clarity and accuracy, we all wanted that, but what it means? These two concepts and experience CANNOT be an absolute meter for reproduced sound, because we listen to music through sound and we listen sound through music and the two experience coincide perfectly only for ONE listener...They vary with each system/room/ears... And the difference between the lived event and the playback is not reducible to zero... In music this is different...music has his own vocabulary and is not reducible to sound...For this reason your musical example is good and made sense musically ...but music is not acoustic and vice versa...
But speaking about recorded sound, translation of sound for a system/room/ears, these 2 concept lost some their power... This is the reason why Jay speaking after the addition of a cable in his system say that they "add too much clarity"...There is no too much clarity in music but we can have "too much clarity" so to speak in the acoustic experience when listening in some room with some system we introduce a a modification in cable...
By the way clarity and accuracy are not synonymus at all...one concept is mostly subjective, the other mostly an objective one in acoustic...And even musically they are not synonymus...
And too much "clarity" on some count can represent a lost of clarity on some acoustical perceived cues because sound is not a sum of external clear elements but an integrated colored WHOLENESS which is perceived too...
Did i miss something?
I am not a scientist nor a musician but it is my experience...