What is meant exactly by the description 'more musical'?

I used to read here on Audiogon about all of the descriptive high-sounding adjectives to describe the sounds coming from a system....’soundstage’, ’layering’, ’decay’, ’imaging’, ’slam’, ’attack’, 'front-to-back', ’height and width’, ’PRAT’, ’air’, ’deeper bass’, ’sweet spot’, etc. .............and in the beginning, I thought it was a bunch of hogwash. But, as I moved up the hifi food chain, all of those adjectives made themselves known and very apparent to me one by one without anyone having to explain it to me. I knew what each one was immediately the first time I heard them. Some of the adjectives upon hearing them the first time was almost like a religious experience....and I kept throwing money at the hobby as faithfully as a religious person pays tithes. In other words, you’ll know it when you hear it...and you’ll miss it when or if it leaves your system.

After all that, I am still unable to explain those adjectives to a nonaudiophile.

....you’ll immediatley know what it is when you hear it.

I will give an example now why a good sound experience has little to do with taste or money and not even with only specific better design quality of a specific component as much useful are a better design and it is ...

I was the owner of pairs of Tannoy gold dual concentric speakers for more than 40 years ...

They are clearly better in design than my actual 100 bucks small active speakers of 4 inches woofer , so good they are ...No comparison in potential good sound experience between a low cost small active speakers and the mythical way better more high end Tannoy ...

it makes no sense to even debate that ... I know it first hand ...

But there is a difference between a better speakers design as the Tannoy when it is not electrically , mechanically and acoustically well embedded because i was ignorant and a less performant speakers two notch under the quality scale, which i modified especially the porthole design , but also now well embedded in the three working dimensions because i am no more so much ignorant ...

...

The best soundfield experience in my life is with these low cost speakers not with the superior Tannoy that i never listened to, unbeknownst to me , in 40 years at their top optimal level anyway because , i was knowing nothing about vibrations/resonance controls, electrical noise/signal ratio level and acoustical control of the room/speakers ...I does not know that a speaker with a porthole is an Helmholtz resonators and that the porthole design MATTER ...Acoustics is not room acoustic which is only a part of it by the way ...

If you think money alone can buy audiophile experience you had many things to learn...Sorry to give you a bad news ... 😊

Price tags and money and taste dont matter as much if they matter at all , as acoustics knowledge and i dont speak only about room acoustic here ...

Learning how to hear matter ...And you dont learn how to hear by purchasing dozen of components as much audiophiles claims here ...

Put you gear taste at rest  and read about acoustics ... It is the only thing that help me ...

u should get the Tannoy back, apply learning s … then draw a conclusion …..

Interesting argument. I’'m with Ralph.

I dont need to buy the Tannoy back to wrote a conclusion ...😉

I dont need them anyway even if they are better for sure as potential element ...

Even sold used at 2000 bucks at least they are over my wallet and they need a bigger room than the small room and desk i now use anyway ... And my actual sound is obscenely good for the price ...😊

Mechanical,electrical and acoustical control of the system/room  matter as much as the design quality of each components   and it had nothing to do with  taste  ... And good design be it for amplifier or speakers is grounded in acoustics not in taste ... And acoustics is a science not just room applied acoustic...

u should get the Tannoy back, apply learning s … then draw a conclusion ….