My only point , once is said that the common place fact which related musicality to a subjective experience for sure, my only point is that it is not just a "taste" ; my only point was that for understanding musicality we must investigate the acoustic multiple factors which are behind this way less variable and arbitrary perception than the word "taste" suggest ...
A so simple observation cannot be contradict by those who claim that musicality is at the end only a purely relative taste with no deep meaning behind ... This deep meaning and factors are in acoustics science ...No one can dismiss acoustic science for the benefit of a tautology presented as a fact ...Musicality is an acoustic phenomenon investigated by acoustics not a mere relative idyosincrasic taste ...
It is incredible that many people are in the obligation to repeat that ...
Psycho-acoustics rule and explain musicality experience which is more than just an individual taste ...
«Taste there is, but taste it is not »-- Groucho Marx 🤓
Maybe in the purest sense, the definition of musicality can’t be "owned" by one individual. Nevertheless, I believe that there are aspects of describing how music sounds when played back that need to be present for many people to say that the sound is musical (for them)...examples might be the tone, the dynamics, the flow, the lack of harshness...but for any individual, that combination of characteristics that makes something musical is personal (to them).