What is Musicality?

Based on my own experiences with musician friends and family (and that's pretty extensive), I would draw absolutely no hard conclusions about their appreciation of high-end components. In this way they vary probably just as widely as the general population in that most don't get the investment, while there are a few who share a great passion about the high-end, as demonstrated by many members here being musicians. I think the inference that because folks have made a career out of music means they necessarily should appreciate what a high-end system is capable of, is not as obvious as one may suppose.

As far as the notion of someone appreciating music MORE than someone else simply because they hear and understand it differently...I'm not even going to go there, except to say that actually understanding how anyone else perceives, experiences, and or enjoys virtually anything is completely impossible for any of us. If you enjoy music, well, then you and I have something in common and I'd much rather enjoy that aspect of our connection than trying to one-up each other. That kind one-upmanship only serves to alienate others. If someone wants to limit their connections with the rest of the world that way, that's their business, but I think it very sad. One of the fundamentally beautiful things about music is that it is a universal language that is capable of connecting with everyone. I find that pretty amazing. Anyone see the film, "The Visitor"? One of my favorite films of all time, and such a beautiful illustration of a similar connection through music between two people. I'd highly recommend it to anyone. That suggests something to me in reflecting on this film. I can draw a parallel to watching a really great film, where you get so caught up in the film, so connected to the emotions and the events you are watching unfold on the screen, so involved with the characters, with such a level of suspension of any disbelief, so much so that you almost entirely forget the fact that you are watching a movie... Musicality, for me is much like that.

Sabai wrote in the OP:

Appreciating good music is not only a matter of how good your equipment is. It is a measure of how musical a person you are. Most people appreciate good music but some people are born more musical than others…

I think Sabai is right about this, and that the same thing could be said of appreciating novels, plays, movies, painting, or any other art form. Appreciation says as much about the appreciator as it does the thing appreciated. This raises the question:

Who are the best appreciators of an art form (in this case, music)?

One possible answer is that the best appreciators of an art form are the artists themselves. So musicians are the best appreciators of music, writers of writing, painters of painting, and so on. If that is true, then a person's APPRECIATION of an art form is directly proportional to his EXPERTISE with that art form. At least one poster, Kijanki, is extremely skeptical about this:

Are you suggesting that musicians are better listeners? Nothing can be further from the truth…Performers are not the best receivers of music, composers are not the best performers etc…

But Learsfool describes this statement as…

…completely absurd on the face of it. One cannot become a professional musician without VERY highly developed critical listening skills...

I think the conflict between Kijanki and Learsfool here is attributable to the fact that Kijanki is talking about listening APPRECIATION, and Learsfool is talking about listening EXPERTISE. That is an inherent ambiguity is the phrase “better listener” throughout this discussion. Here are the two possible interpretations:

1. Better listener = greater APPRECIATION.
...or...
2. Better listener = greater EXPERTISE.

I think that Learsfool is correct when he points out that professional musicians are better listeners in the sense that they have greater listening EXPERTISE than non-musicians. But I also think that Kijanki is correct when he points out that having greater listening expertise does not guarantee greater listening APPRECIATION.

I have expertise with an art form (not music), having spent nearly ten years devoted to it, and I can say from personal experience that the relationship between expertise and appreciation is not simple or linear. For example:

i. Expertise, particularly in its early stages, promotes analytic perception, which can be an obstacle to the appreciation of an art form. However, expertise, in its later stages, promotes holistic perception, which enhances the appreciation of an art form.

ii. Expertise raises a person’s standard for “good” art, which can be an obstacle to the appreciation of works that do not meet that personal standard. However, expertise, by raising a person’s standards for “good” art, can intensify a person’s appreciation of works that do meet that personal standard.

These are just two examples of how the relationship between expertise and appreciation is complicated, changing, and sometimes unpredictable. To be sure, artists know far more about their art form than others, but that knowledge can be both a blessing and a curse, when it comes to appreciation.

Byroncunningham, you make some very astute observations here. IMHO it is very important to differentiate between expertise and appreciation. It cannot be an a priori assumption that expertise necessarily means a greater sense of appreciation. The appreciation of an "expert" may be different from a "non-expert" but the former is not necessarily deeper or felt with greater intensity or sensitivity than by the latter. The appreciation of the "expert" may have a different perspective superimposed upon it because that is what happens when one becomes an "expert". There are meanings that emerge for "experts" that may not emerge for "non-experts". But not appreciating those "special meanings" that influence the "expert" does not mean that the experience of the "expert" is on higher level than that of the "non-expert". It simply means that they may be experiencing the music differently.

Sabai

Appreciate is the wrong word. I think understand/comprehend is better. When viewing a movie, another film director would better understand how the film is made, but it doesn't mean he/she would appreciate it any better than a non-director. I can enjoy a Bill Evans recorded performance as much as anyone else, but another jazz pianist is in a much better position to fully understand the technical and musical elements Mr. Evans is working with. It stands to reason that a musician is in a better position to judge the sound of an instrument. Who's opinion about a cello's sound carries more weight, Yo-Yo Ma's or some audiophile with a 6 figure plus system? It's not that the audiophile can't have an informed opinion, but why would it be better than someone who has lived and breathed the instrument for the past 50 years?

Musicality is a word used by audiophiles that can mean any number of things. It's a vague concept. Personally I don't see how any component can add musicality to a performance. Some components mangle what is already there less than others.