Is "detailed" audiophile code for too much treble?

Another way to look at this, does “reality” have too much detail? Barring the use of excess hallucinogenic drugs, the answer is “no”.

But in music, what is reality?

Just one example that we’ve probably all heard.

When I listen to my system, I often hear a piano miced so that I can hear the action/thump of the pedals and sometimes even the hammers retracting.

I don’t think I’ve ever listened to someone play a song on the piano where I had my head in there and could hear this stuff.

So this IS reality, but who’s reality?

The best test is a symphony orchestra.

+1 Many audiophiles will shake in their pants before they touch the orchestra though ....because that’s when their million dollar rigs fall apart (all gear sold by the emperors with no clothes shall get exposed).

I define detailed not by amount of treble but rather when attack and decay are correct and not smeared in time. So sound is not muddied by the fact that notes sound longer than they should be and do not start overlaping with other.

One person's 'too much' can be another person's 'not enough'.....

This is a great thread - I had the same questions and this thread is very informative.  It seemed to me, that for my ear, with each bump up in resolution or detail due to better components, the tone or frequency shifted slightly upwards, making the entire presentation seem a tad bit brighter.  Not necessary annoy bright, but just a different presentation due to the added details.  I am probably far down the wrong path, but for example, for a bass note that might be at 100 hz, but with more detail, the extra detailed vibration of a string, I might be picking up 200 hz tone on top of the 100 hz, or a higher order harmonic.  The 200 hz signal with the underlying 100 hz tone might then give the perception of a higher tone or frequency, although the added detail or more realistic sound and welcome.  Anyway, just thinking out loud.  

@12many… “that for my ear, with each bump up in resolution or detail due to better components, the tone or frequency shifted slightly upwards, making the entire presentation seem a tad bit brighter”.

+1 For me as well.

That is an easy path to take. Auditioning better equipment you listen for what is most easily discernible… detail… it often comes with a slight bump in brightness. I have followed this path and ended up with a very sterile system. I refocused on the music and quickly refocused on Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, VAC and Sonus Faber which focus on the music first (midrange bloom and rhythm / pace) then add detail and bass without allowing the overall tonal balance to change. In the end with these products you get the overall gestalt of the music without highlighted (exaggerated) details.

Doesn’t mean that sound is not pleasurable to many people. Different folks listen to different things. Some folks like to have their chest feel the bass, some the violinist move their foot, but some want to recreate the real thing and emotional connection… an easy path to loose in the process.

For those who are sensitive to bright/strident sounds, I often think one solution is a “soft” dome tweeter.