What is Musicality?

Jax2 - People became more practical in last 50-70 years and tend to learn only skills that have some market value. It was different before. Generations of our fathers or grandfathers were learning often useless skills believing that life is not practical (has no purpose) to start with. People used to learn singing just for the pleasure of it. My father was learning Greek and Latin etc.

Music role was also different. In many cultures (China for instance) music was on such high pedestal that was breaking social divisions. Peasant was allowed to perform with noble man or even emperor if he possessed required skills. Music and dance ability was subject of an exam for higher government positions. In modern India, every movie has dance and singing sequence every 10 min. - if it doesn't it means it was made for US. In many countries (whole Europe) there is a a special government department in charge of culture (music art etc).

In western culture government was involved in promotion of art and music for centuries - not so much today, at least here. We're closing music and art programs in schools calling it a waste of taxpayers' money.

It is interesting that economic crisis in our country makes it worse for the art and music but same conditions in India produced world best musicians like Ali Akbar Khan (at least Yehudi Menuhin called him that) who had been learning music 18 hours a day for 20 years because competition is so strong that only the best are successful.

I just wonder if he, having no equal, could enjoy music played by others as much as I do.

Jax2, I was not trying to elevate women or audiophiles in my comments. I was just trying to point out the different ways different people experience music. For me experiencing music in its wholeness is what musicality is all about. I believe that more men than women are doing the buying and selling on Audiogon as well as participating in its forums. Does this have any meaning? I believe it does. I believe it means men think more about audio systems than women do. Both may be able to appreciate the music deeply but I believe more men than women have a tendency to become concerned about specific aspects of the music and the equipment it produces unless the latter are musicians or are in the music industry. Women have a more innate and natural ability to just sit down and enjoy the music without letting their brain interfere with their appreciation of it. Not that women may not notice a particular shortcoming in the sound reproduction. On the contrary, they may pick up on it faster than their partner. But because their partner may be more involved in the technical side of things he may be more worried about how to upgrade or tweak to get things just right and may spend a lot more time on Audiogon trying to figure things out.

Sabai

I was not suggesting that you had "elevated" anyone, Sabai. I'm sorry, I reread what I wrote and realize that I was not clear. I included it in the same sentence which might have implied that, qualifying it with the phrase, "..OR, making broad generalizations..." The inference of elevating a group was more around the discussion of those with a more thorough knowledge of music having the capacity to enjoy music more, as well as the idea of elevating celebrity, both of which I think are absurd notions myself. My comment around what you said about women, is more about generalizing about any group of people - sure, you can generalize, but I was trying to point out that generalizations are most certainly not a rule. For instance, I do not fit your general descriptions of men and women that you've set forth as based on fact, and on Carl Jung's studies. I am not at all a cogitator and operate far more on feelings than I do on thinking. I also have known many men and women who are the exception to these generalizations. I have no doubt the studies exist as you say they do. Again, I don't see the point in the same way I don't see the point of implying something like; more caucasians are audiophiles than African-Americans. That may be one person's experience, and there may actually be studies to back this statement up, but really, what's the point? What does this information serve to do? In some contexts far more harm than good. Perhaps it's that I'm not a cogitator (though I guess these tomes require a bit of reflecting, so there's certainly some element of that in me). I'd rather just experience people, and the world, at face value than try to predict everything ahead of time. But I digress, as usual. Just my .02 Lincolns on the subject.

Music appreciation and the audiophile are mutually exclusive. Aquiring the electronics and building a sound system to reproduce sound is a materialistic hobby. Sure the basis for an audiophile is the love of music but when many of us have stereos costing many times that of our music collections, our priorities become obvious. My wife is perfectly happy walking around the house playing her music out of the tiny speaker built into her cellphone. Of course, she can hear the difference with my nice stereo, but it does not matter to her. I know people with music collections far exceeding the value of the stereo they play them on. btw- some are musicians, and some are not.

Why do we keep upgrading/tweaking our systems? Simple, we get bored with the music side of it and need a change to spice things up. I liken it to the day I got an HDTV and HD Cable. I was sitting there mesmerized by the detailed, crisp picture of a baseball game. My wife walked in and asked why the sudden interest in sports? I said, it's not about the game, it is about the picture quality. She just shook her head and left.

"Simple, we get bored with the music side of it and need a change to spice things up"

Tonywinsc - do you think that listening thru better equipment doesn't offer better overall experience? People get better TVs to see games better not just for the sake of having larger TV. I had a choice of listening to music with poor sound or with good sound. What do you think I chose.