Why isn’t more detail always better?

When I got the cymbles right on my system I was shocked how much of the sound was brassy midrange (like the real thing)…

@ghdprentice I got the same thing when switch from SS to McIntosh 240 amp. I could hear the burnished brass. I know you are not supposed to hear a color but I could. "Brassy" is not a detail but it is a something.

I get a similar experience switching from delta sigma DAC to NOS. D-S is dynamic and more full range but has a kind of "bleached out" sound quality. When I switch to NOS the color comes back into the music.

The way you describe your original system sounds like a "cerebral cortex system". But now is limbic. Which is right depends on the person. but IME I am dissatisfied withe the cerebral system because I keep hearing all the technical faults. As Detlof said something about hearing the music through all the audiophile smog.

atmasphere explains it here

When most people think of hi-end they imagine a "Cerebral cortex system." because that is how recording engineers listen. And that is what impresses when you listen to hi-end for the first time. Maybe you never go beyond that stage and that is okay if you find satisfaction in it.

One problem with detail is when recording, they put the mic right up to the instrument and then add that track to the mix. Of course there is more detail than if you listen in a normal way from 10-20 feet away.

What is being said at exactly 4:41? This was asked on another forum and no one could answer until I did, at which point many agreed.

Does your system have the detail so that you can understand this?

https://youtu.be/_dbYxAr697w

Hello,
I don't understand the question, actually. You ask if more detail would be less good?
But then there's the music, period. A system can be transparent, allowing the sound to appear as it should. If it doesn't sound good, it's not due to the "details" you hear better, but to the room you're listening to, and the materials you've chosen. 
The choice of recording quality is also very important. But a system that's transparent in the sense that it's balanced can't be bad.

@mapman

"Bloom" is something mostly heard in live music, and rarely in reproduced (recorded) music (and the systems most of us have).

It is when the harmonics (overtones) of an instrument (or an orchestra) spread outwards in space, the way it does Live in a symphony hall (but not in a rock concert, which is about brute force). In most systems, "bloom" is the least likely trait to be achieved, as that is typically seen in very expensive systems. My WATTs - none of the generations I had - were not the type of speaker to produce "bloom." The WATT, in its first four generations, had much more of the "direct" sound, which is what Dave Wilson was aiming for when he recorded. Most of his recordings were violin/piano very close to the microphone, so there is not much bloom there. My Avalons and Infinity  speakers did do that. It is not related to attack or decay. Think of it as a kind of "echo" in that it goes on for seconds after a string is plucked, or percussion hit (assuming they don't silence the instrument manually). But the main point is that pop/rock music rarely ever have bloom. That is the purview of classical/jazz/international music,  and even THEY must be VERY well recorded.